Diablo 3 going to hell?

To put it bluntly, Blizzard Entertainment has announced recently that Diablo 3 will require a constant connection to the Battle.net servers in order to play.  As  disappointed as I am by that fact, I had to take some time to think about it.

Would I really play in single-player?  No.  That's not my thing.  I'm a Battle.net guy after all.  So why am I bothered by lack of single-player, or even LAN for that matter?

The answer is in two parts:

Firstly, as a consumer, I expect MORE features in the products I buy.  Diablo 2 had eight player CO-OP, 5 character classes, a more robust online experience, a personal stash, more variety of item mechanics (gems, weapon sets, tomes, etc), a better presentation and a more polished gameplay (the ability to run).  I probably missed a few but that's a lot of improvements over the original.

Now, I'm not suggesting that Diablo 3 won't have it's share of improvements, but it seems that they're taking a few steps back at the same time.  You have to stop and think about the reasoning behind their design choices; at least the one they're feeding us.  To prevent hackers and cheaters.

Before I talk more about my opinion on this, I have to point out something about this logic.  It's a very good one.  One might say: "why don't you separate the characters between offline and online?  That'll prevent the cheating, right?". It's not about whenever or not a character is online that causes the hacks and cheats, its how the game handles the information that allows these things to exist.

When playing multi-player games, the computers involved have to send each other information.  Character location, health, items, attacks, etc.  It's all encrypted but it's a heck of a lot easier to decode that when it's happening on an isolated network (read : LAN).  Online games have a security advantage because it's all run by the servers... The servers tells your computer what's going on and your computer can't change that.

That's why Starcraft 2 doesn't have LAN support.  It's also a bitch to code so no LAN = simpler code.  If Starcraft 2 had LAN, hackers would be able to figure out the intricacies of the code and ruin the game for everyone.  Anything that's client side can be easily hacked.

But here's the second part:  Starcraft 2 is a COMPETITIVE game.  Diablo 3 is not.  In fact, it's practically exclusively PvM (player vs monster - or PvE for the young folks).  So why can't Diablo 3 have an offline mode when Starcraft 2 does?  For security reasons?  Bullshit!  Of the two games, Starcraft is the one that needs the uptight security.  It's a game designed to play against people.

"Well," you might say to yourself, "Diablo 3 does have an auction house involving real money.  You wouldn't want that to be cracked and abused."

That's true.  One might be able to crack the code if the auction house was part of the SINGLE-PLAYER experience...  What?  Hello?  You're going solo and your offline, just make your auction house a server-only deal and your problem is solved.  If your playing solo, the last thing on your mind is trading with other players.  Sure, you'll be able to do that in Diablo 3 but at what cost?  The lack of offline mode?  No thanks!

As disappointed as i am, I'm still buying it.  Curse you, Blizzard!